Does anyone know why? Is it because:- it's difficult / impossible to do with certain bits of kits- or, organisers think it's unfair to enable SIAC because not everyone has one,- or, something else?

If it's the latter, I thought we had as a federation concluded that it was fine to have mixed punching, despite some people's objections - but I guess clubs can do what they like? Still a bit unfortunate to have some nice tech available but not use it.

One possible reason, that I've posted before, is that SIAC does not record a copy of the punch in the control box. So for a club, or organiser, enabling SIAC is consciously disabling a potential safety feature that could significantly narrow down a search area if someone goes missing. In the worst case scenario, say of that competitor dying from hypothermia, the club and organiser would have to defend that decision in front of a coroner - when claiming "It was at their own risk, but I wanted him/her to be able to save a few seconds" is just not going to cut it.

The risk of such a scenario is clearly very low, but it isn't zero, and why should a club or organiser take that risk when it is unnecessary? It isn't as if people are choosing not to go to non-SIAC-enabled events. And in addition it isn't clear what position BO's insurers would take, if we have some nice (safety) tech available but not use it!

SI boxes in "beacon mode" (which means they are enabled for contactless SIAC punching) use much more battery than when not in beacon mode. Hence there is an issue of cost to consider, in deciding whether or not to enable contactless punching. Battery replacement in a series 7/8 station costs around £13, so I reckon it's in the order of £50-£100 per event, for putting them into beacon mode.

SYO will be putting SI boxes into contactless mode only at a few of its' events.

Isn't SIAC more suited to sprint/urban events? So the argument is that it is used at all of these if the clubs kit allows for it. Unlikely to have any lost competitors suffering from hypo on a 3km course round a school, town, uni etc.

Do the "big boys and girls" use SIAC at the WOCs, JWOCs etc in forest areas - middle & longs.

Is there a need to have SIAC at a forest events where the risks of lost competitors etc are higher and time saved using the "swipe" is minimal?

I am not a fan of SIAC and only see it as a money making venture by Sportident and generates the haves against the have nots (if you have a stack of cash or not - total monopoly on supply). I'll stick with my SI card 5, still works after 10+ years.

"PhilJ" I am not a fan of SIAC and only see it as a money making venture by Sportident and generates the haves against the have nots (if you have a stack of cash or not - total monopoly on supply). I'll stick with my SI card 5, still works after 10+ years.

Snail wrote:One possible reason, that I've posted before, is that SIAC does not record a copy of the punch in the control box. So for a club, or organiser, enabling SIAC is consciously disabling a potential safety feature that could significantly narrow down a search area if someone goes missing. In the worst case scenario, say of that competitor dying from hypothermia, the club and organiser would have to defend that decision in front of a coroner - when claiming "It was at their own risk, but I wanted him/her to be able to save a few seconds" is just not going to cut it.

On that argument, every club using EMIT would have to make a similar defence of their decision to choose a technology that doesn't record a punch in the control box.

Personally, although I can see arguments for and against enabling SIAC at every event, I'm yet to be convinced that having a punch recorded in the box confers a significant safety benefit. Are there any examples of downloading control boxes being of assistance in locating a missing competitor? And how easy is this to do in practice?

Genuine questions - I don't know whether SiTiming or AutoDownload make it easy to see which on-course boxes a competitor has punched when based on downloading the boxes rather than the card, or how feasible it is to download a control in situ and send the data back (connection permitting), rather than waiting for the units to be physically returned to the event centre.

British Orienteering Director | Opinions expressed on here are entirely my own, and do not represent the views of British Orienteering."If only you were younger and better..."

1) switching control boxes between SIAC enabled and not does require each one to be reprogrammed. So, in SLOW we have made the switch once and left it at that, unless special circumstances dictate

2) a better solution for the safety issue is to use a couple of radio controls. We have bought a couple of the special SI boxes for that purpose. That way you get real-time feedback at key points, rather than having to wait for all controls to be collected in. The flaw of the ‘collect in and check the boxes ‘ solution is that it assumes that you only start worrying about competitors after courses close, rather than consider an early starter who is well overdue. The radios controls also give you the possibility of starting to collect in ‘early’ controls once all competitors have been through them

That's good to know. My statement was based on a report that our units had used 10% of their battery capacity at one urban event (hence £1.30 per event per control, or £65 for say 50 controls). If it's a lot less than that, that's good.

PhilJ wrote:I am not a fan of SIAC and only see it as a money making venture by Sportident...+

It is a common belief but it does make one flawed assumption, which is that the development of SportIdent kit is solely driven by foot-O. In fact much is driven by mountain biking events and, in particular, downhill. Stopping to dib at an SI station for timing doesn’t work if you are coming downhill at 30mph+...and SportIdent provide a lot of timing for this kind of event, including finish gates etc. Contactless can also be a definite plus for MTBO, saving the need to dismount to punch on occasion.

Electronic timing technology will continue to develop, driven by a number of sports - which elements Orienteering chooses to adopt is a separate matter.

A balancing decision has the be made about how long the boxes remain active after last use. If boxes are being put out the day before the event (say) then will they be programmed to stay awake until the event (heavy battery usage) or be ‘ woken up’ on the morning of the event with 2 hour (say) active time (between runners) whilst being checked ?. A definite issue is that if the box is ‘asleep’ the first runner through will have to dib to wake it up. If it has not been woken up and the first runner through is using SIAC they will have to dib instead - and hence wake it up for everyone following . In general we tend to visit all controls on the morning of the event as a check, so it is not a problem, but...

maprun wrote:Do you know of other sports that have two timing systems that run in parallel?

Road running has far more than two! The only difference is that (in the UK at least) the timing chips are almost always hired, and included in the entry fee (they're often disposable as well, since they don't have to be as clever as for orienteering).

Sure you have results going off the starters gun, plus chip timing results which the organiser's use to produce an adjusted ("fair") set of chip timed results, and there are numerous timing systems across sports, but I'm not aware of any that run two in parallel that give variances of up to 5% within the only set of results.